(Video: MSNBC)
MSNBC legal analyst Joyce Vance threw cold water on the idea that Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas could be hauled in front of Nancy Pelosi’s sham committee on the so-called “insurrection” when the televised hearings are held next month.
Mrs. Thomas was the target of a Friday Washington Post report claiming that she reached out to two Arizona Republicans to urge them to “take action to ensure that a clean slate of electors is chosen” in the aftermath of the 2020 election, one which the loser, former President Donald J. Trump continues to contend wasn’t on the up-and-up.
The paper’s big scoop on emails sent by Thomas to the lawmakers states that they were sent on November 9, 2020 through FreeRoots, which the WaPo describes as “a website meant to give political organizers an efficient means of conducting email campaigns.”
Despite the date of the emails being two months before the chaos at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, the anti-constitutional lynch mob on the political left has been salivating over the idea that Justice Thomas’s spouse could be dragged in front of Pelosi’s stacked committee in a spectacle vaguely reminiscent of a show trial in the old Soviet Union but on Saturday, MSNBC’s Joyce Vance found herself wearing the shoes of the bearer of bad news.
According to Vance who appeared on Saturday’s edition of “The Cross Connection” to break down the Post story with guest host Katie Phang, who was filling in for Tiffany Cross, Ginni Thomas should be grilled by the former Democrat impeachment managers along with malicious actor Liz Cheney but likely won’t due to the “sensitivities” of a public interrogation of a family member of a Supreme Court justice.
Phang asked, “Why is this not news enough, new news, enough to put Ginni Thomas in an interview seat to have to answer questions?”
“It should put Ginni Thomas in that interview seat, probably from the committee, certainly from the Justice Department,” answered the former federal prosecutor. “But, Katie, we live in this real world where there are sensitivities surrounding Supreme Court justices and their families.”
“And I think it will be difficult, quite frankly, for people to navigate these issues, where in fact, it should be simple,” Vance added, “because if Ginni Thomas was anyone else with the sort of knowledge she’s displayed on multiple issues, investigators would sit down and have a chat with her, not necessarily that she’s a target for investigation, but they would want to know what she knows.”
“And most importantly, here,” she continued, “is this incredible coincidence that she’s out pushing this same scheme that we know ultimately comes to fruition among those closest to Trump, this scheme to create blank slates of electors. Electors who aren’t the choice of the people, but who are instead are pansies for the former president, people who are supposed to go in and do his work for him.”
“And That’s a little bit too close for comfort, that coincidence. So that warrants further investigation,” Vance said.
Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
Chris Donaldson is an ordinary American who is concerned about rampant corruption as well as the ongoing attacks on our way of life by those who have contempt for our hard-earned freedoms. A Navy veteran, he has been a frequent contributor to conservative websites and resides in Florida.
- Mamdani appointee resigns after her anti-Semitic social media posts resurface - December 19, 2025
- Grinch Christmas card pulled from supermarket chain after transgender activist complains - December 19, 2025
- Trump trolls Biden, Obama in savage new plaques added to White House Presidential Walk of Fame - December 18, 2025
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
BPR INSIDER COMMENTS
Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!
4 thoughts on “MSNBC legal analyst crushes leftist hopes of seeing Ginni Thomas grilled by Pelosi’s dubious J6 panel”
Comments are closed.
The real reason(s) Ginni Thomas won’t (and shouldn’t) be hauled before Nancy Pelosi’s “Stalinist Show Trial” is that there is no reasonable causal connection between a couple private e-mails urging a “clean election” (which, it turns out, we did NOT have in Arizona, which is now looking at decertifying its results) and a demonstration (NOT involving Ginni Thomas or any of her correspondents) which occurred in DC over 2 months later. In the words of the old farmer, “you cain’t git theyuh from hey-uh…” (not, of course, that there was anything remotely resembling an “insurrection” on Jan 6, 2021 anyway). It’s not about “political sensitivities” (per MSNBC’s “legal analyst” – one more reason to make me ashamed of my career as a lawyer…), it’s about common sense. There’s far better/greater cause to haul Nancy Pelosi up on charges for inciting the acts and threats of violence against the Supreme Court in the wake of the Roe leak. Pelosi’s acts actually break real laws and have actually (and demonstrably) resulted in real harm and she should have been arrested and charged (and it’s not a defense that she was likely stinking drunk at the time she made her unreasonable and unlawful remarks).
From what I read, she just put her name to a pre written letter to representatives. This didn’t seem to be well thought out by her, but hardly something she purposely drafted
Since the planner and organizer of the Pelosi riots is not going to be questioned under oath by this committee, the committee is nothing more than Salem Mass in 1637. FJB
Seems to me all Ginni Thomas has done is exercise her First Amendment rights.